Debunking the Surface FUD

[Joelist]

With all the FUD (Fear - Uncertainty - Doubt) that has been flooding this site I thought it might be a good idea to push back. Here is some of the FUD refuted - feel free to add more:

1) FUD: The resolution on the Surface is too low!.

FACT: Resolution is not the most important factor in a display. So long as it is high enough not to cause jagged fonts or visible pixels (and the Surface resolution is more than high enough) other factors such as color reproduction, touch sensitivity and usability in sunlight are far more important. And from what we know the Surface displays (ClearType HD) score top of the range in all those areas. The binding of the screen layers used is VERY advanced and this is the first time it has been successfully used on something the size of a tablet (HTC used something like it on the One X and Nokia uses something like it on the Lumia 920. The result is superb color fidelity and that effect of the images being right on top of the display instead of back behind glass - it also contributes to being really good in sunlight.

2) FUD: The iPad has a better CPU.

FACT: The iPad has a stronger GPU not CPU. But it also needs that GPU to drive the super dense display being used. The Surface GPU is fully adequate to both drive its display and play pretty much any game out there smoothly. On the CPU front the iPad may be slightly stringer in a single threaded scenario but Surface with its Tegra 3 kills it in multithreaded applications. And in the tablet world (especially with WinRT) multithreaded is where things are going.

3) FUD: Windows RT has no Apps!!!!!

FACT: This is addressed in two spheres. One is that MS has made porting apps from iOS/Android to WinRT crazy easy with the new Visual Studio (and the Express versions are free so no cost barrier to entry).

The other is a bit more subtle but VERY effective when you show it to people. Windows RT does WAY more "out of the box" than iOS or Android do. A lot of the social experiences that those OSes need Apps to do are baked into the Windows OS. And those experiences feel much more "holistic" in Windows than in the others where the Apps are silos that cannot interoperate.

Another big example is that both iOS and Android are terrible at handling and especially creating/editing content. You have to shell out $$$ to get "office type" apps for those OSes and even then those Apps are not that good. WindowsRT meanwhile has real, full Office baked in. That is huge because it means that unlike the iPad and Android tablets the Surface is a real TOOL not a "toy" - you can do actual productivity work on it.

More to come?

 

[brmiller1976]

I say let the sales numbers speak for themselves. The naysayers are looking pretty silly with a 24 hour sellout of preorders!

 

[jimski]

Keep it coming Joelist. Glad I got my pre-order in early yesterday. Can't wait to let my iPad friends play with it.

Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express Pro

 

[Reflexx]

Just for clarification, it doesn't have "FULL" Office on it. But it does have Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote.

 

[Joelist]

Just for clarification, it doesn't have "FULL" Office on it. But it does have Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote.

That is full Office. none of those applications are limited versions - they are the real, full featured and fully functional versions of those applications.

 

[Reflexx]

That is full Office. none of those applications are limited versions - they are the real, full featured and fully functional versions of those applications.

I normally consider "full" as including everything. Like Outlook, Lync, Access, etc...

Don't get me wrong. The consumer version is great to 95% of people. And I think it's the "killer app" that will ensure success for RT.

 

[mmacleodbrown]

That is full Office. none of those applications are limited versions - they are the real, full featured and fully functional versions of those applications.

It isn't full office - there was a list floating around showing the things Excel couldn't do compared to its desktop offering. To be honest though only advanced users might notice. I was very impressed over the control system demo for OneNote, that alone pretty much sold me.

Im either going to get a surface, or a surface with CoverTrail as that will give me x86 compatibility, Im just waiting for the reviews to compare battery life before deciding..

 

[Joelist]

Just for clarification, it doesn't have "FULL" Office on it. But it does have Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote.

It isn't full office - there was a list floating around showing the things Excel couldn't do compared to its desktop offering. To be honest though only advanced users might notice. I was very impressed over the control system demo for OneNote, that alone pretty much sold me.

Im either going to get a surface, or a surface with CoverTrail as that will give me x86 compatibility, Im just waiting for the reviews to compare battery life before deciding..

I've seen the list. One - it's VERY short. Two - most of the "features" are not there because Office 2013 does the function in a different way. So the functionality is still there but it is done differently (like SkyDrive integration - it is still there just uses different steps). The only actual feature not in the RT version is writing VBA applications and really that is not the big thing nowadays anyway.

 

[freestaterocker]

+1 billion internets to the OP. Surface RT is a tool, iPad is a toy. For my usage case, the 32gb RT with a type cover can REPLACE my laptop, and I haven't had a desktop machine in years. So $630USD + shipping basically gives me my next computer. WIN.

 

[Coreldan]

+1 billion internets to the OP. Surface RT is a tool, iPad is a toy. For my usage case, the 32gb RT with a type cover can REPLACE my laptop, and I haven't had a desktop machine in years. So $630USD + shipping basically gives me my next computer. WIN.

Same for me.

I never considered getting a tablet until I saw the Surface. Sure it could've been a fancy toy, but I've been using a netbook the past 2 years cos I sit in the train 3 hours a day (plus university itself) every weekday, so I need something that has productivity.

My netbook is old and slow now and it barely cuts the mustard so that I can wait till Surface. Now, as said I dont have a tablet, despite one "would be cool to have" but I could never justify buying one. Now my university mobile productivity tool (Surface) will also double as a tablet for those "would be fun to have" occasions!

I just love how the Surface can be many things with so little effort.. sort of a laptop/netbook replacement with the keyboard and kickstand, with just the kickstand a nice entertainment platform (for me it being integrated into the device is a big thing, I dont really care for aftermarket covers for the iPad for example) or just a handheld tablet that will in matter of seconds (without even having to dig any docking stations from my bag) be switched to any of the three mentioned.

I sound very fanboyish but I have no special relations to Microsoft except having used Windows all my life. I'm more of a Nokia ******, which leads me into getting a WP8 phone now (920, havnt had WP before), but as soon as I saw the Surface keynote, I was just so totally sold. It fills my needs like 100%. I rarely have needs for any x86 apps on my netbook (that I couldnt have with RT, that is) but sometimes I've had some small use and it could be nice to have with the Surface too, but I can totally live without that for the Surface. That said, the lack of executables and having MS approved apps only has its good sides.. Malicious software will be pretty much extinct on the Surface RT. One of the downsides with a netbook is having to cram in an antivirus and firewall with the already way too limited resources. So while no x86 apps is a downside, it's not all that dark if you can manage without them

 

[tgr42]

MS has made porting apps from iOS/Android to WinRT crazy easy with the new Visual Studio (and the Express versions are free so no cost barrier to entry).

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but as someone who has been getting paid to develop on Windows for 17 years, I can tell you that your statement is flat out wrong on multiple levels.

First of all, you can't port apps from iOS/Android to WinRT. You have to REWRITE THEM. From scratch. WinRT has completely different APIs. And in most cases, you can't even use the same language. Most iOS apps are written in Objective-C, which can't be used for WinRT. Most Android apps are written in Java, which can't be used for WinRT. Most WinRT apps are written in C++ or C#, and possibly JavaScript, none of which are particularly viable on iOS or Android (although C# and C++ can be used with certain limitations).

There is simply no good cross platform solution for supporting Windows, Windows RT, Windows Phone 7, iOS, and Android. You have to develop entirely separate versions of your apps for each platform you want to support, which is why it's taken so long to get some of the more popular apps onto Windows Phone 7 - and why you'll never see a lot of them.

Developers would love more than anything to be able to write once and run everywhere. Unfortunately the technology is just not there, and that's the way the platform creators like it.

By the way, to even make a "Hello world" Windows Store app using Visual Studio, you are required to have an Internet connection and a valid Microsoft account. Some developers have already been complaining about this even though it's free. To publish your app to the store, you must pay a yearly subscription fee to be a developer. Then there are other costs, the hassle of having to go through certification, go through Microsoft to push out every update, give Microsoft a cut of every hard earned sale of your app, the sandboxing that prevents you from doing MANY things you used to be able to do and gives privileged apps such as Office an unfair advantage, etc etc. There are lots of downsides for developers to this new model from both technical and business perspectives.

Developers will go there anyway, to the extent that it is possible, because there are some upsides (it's not ALL bad), but the picture being painted in this thread so far is entirely too rosy. Get realistic, people.

 

[crystal_planet]

+1 billion internets to the OP. Surface RT is a tool, iPad is a toy. For my usage case, the 32gb RT with a type cover can REPLACE my laptop, and I haven't had a desktop machine in years. So $630USD + shipping basically gives me my next computer. WIN.

Dude, are you sure you want to do that? That's a lot of internets.

**Sent from my Windows Phone using Board Express**

 

[tgr42]

By the way, I think people often fail to fully recognize just how much they have to give up right now to get the slick form factor of a tablet. In the netbook/laptop form factor, you can pay half as much and get a MUCH more powerful machine with 10x the storage (and can be upgraded!) and it can run millions and millions of apps with no restrictions... for example:

http://www.amazon.com/Acer-AO725-08...ag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=UUwpUvbUpU1718420

For gadget enthusiasts, it's not such a big deal. But it's a different story for people on a tight budget who just need to get stuff done, and there are a lot of people like that out there.

Next year when Haswell comes out, I hope we will see tablets/hybrids with more competitive performance, flexibility, and pricing.

 

[stmav]

I normally consider "full" as including everything. Like Outlook, Lync, Access, etc...

Don't get me wrong. The consumer version is great to 95% of people. And I think it's the "killer app" that will ensure success for RT.

I agree. This version is great and does what most people use office for. A big selling point. But a "full" Office has Outlook and Access as well.

 

[Reflexx]

By the way, I think people often fail to fully recognize just how much they have to give up right now to get the slick form factor of a tablet. In the netbook/laptop form factor, you can pay half as much and get a MUCH more powerful machine with 10x the storage (and can be upgraded!) and it can run millions and millions of apps with no restrictions... for example:



http://www.amazon.com/Acer-AO725-08...ag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=UUwpUvbUpU1718424



For gadget enthusiasts, it's not such a big deal. But it's a different story for people on a tight budget who just need to get stuff done, and there are a lot of people like that out there.



Next year when Haswell comes out, I hope we will see tablets/hybrids with more competitive performance, flexibility, and pricing.

I think the Netbook experience is pretty horrid. Half of power I use on my netbook is just for things like antivirus and antimalware. Half of my installed programs are for maintaining the netbook itself.

Give me something that runs Office, can browse the web, and is FAST and you have a winner.

 

[crystal_planet]

I'd imagine a pro or business edition will be available in the future as an upgrade.

**Sent from my Windows Phone using Board Express**

 

[stmav]

By the way, I think people often fail to fully recognize just how much they have to give up right now to get the slick form factor of a tablet. In the netbook/laptop form factor, you can pay half as much and get a MUCH more powerful machine with 10x the storage (and can be upgraded!) and it can run millions and millions of apps with no restrictions... for example:

Amazon.com: Acer Aspire One AO725-0899 11.6" Netbook (AMD Dual Core Processor, 2GB RAM, 320GB Hard Drive, Windows 7 HP 64 bits) Volcano Black: Computers & Accessories

For gadget enthusiasts, it's not such a big deal. But it's a different story for people on a tight budget who just need to get stuff done, and there are a lot of people like that out there.

Next year when Haswell comes out, I hope we will see tablets/hybrids with more competitive performance, flexibility, and pricing.

I can find better priced 15" laptops. So if I'm someone who's on a tight budget and just needs to get stuff done, I think I'd like a little more bang for my buck than that acer.

But then those people aren't in this forum talking about the new Surface tablets. More than likely, they aren't on any tech forum.

Edit to add: Add another $119 if you want Office on any of those laptops.

 

[tgr42]

I think the Netbook experience is pretty horrid. Half of power I use on my netbook is just for things like antivirus and antimalware. Half of my installed programs are for maintaining the netbook itself.

Give me something that runs Office, can browse the web, and is FAST and you have a winner.

Anti-virus and anti-malware software is no substitute for safe computing practices, and if your machine is consumed by these types of programs you are doing it wrong. Sorry.

As for maintenance, Windows 7 comes with all of the maintenance tools you need built in. If you opt to install third party maintenance tools, that is at your discretion, but I would hardly call it mandatory.

Regarding performance, netbooks like the one I linked are not fast compared to more expensive laptops and desktops, but they still have FAR more CPU and GPU power than any ARM chip like the one in the Surface. If used correctly (say on a clean install of Windows 8), I doubt anyone would characterize it as slow or "horrid".

Your argument does make some sense if you're talking about inexperienced computer users who are incapable or unwilling to learn how to run a clean Windows machine successfully, and may be just going with the flow using pre-installed crapware. Admittedly the full version of Windows comes with challenges that offset its greater power and flexibility, and it's not worth it for a lot of people who don't need any more than the very basics of computing. Although this is offset substantially by Windows 8, which provides a great deal of out-of-the-box protection for these kinds of users.

 

[Reflexx]

Anti-virus and anti-malware software is no substitute for safe computing practices, and if your machine is consumed by these types of programs you are doing it wrong. Sorry.



As for maintenance, Windows 7 comes with all of the maintenance tools you need built in. If you opt to install third party maintenance tools, that is at your discretion, but I would hardly call it mandatory.



Regarding performance, netbooks like the one I linked are not fast compared to more expensive laptops and desktops, but they still have FAR more CPU and GPU power than any ARM chip like the one in the Surface. If used correctly (say on a clean install of Windows 8), I doubt anyone would characterize it as slow or "horrid".



Your argument does make some sense if you're talking about inexperienced computer users who are incapable or unwilling to learn how to run a clean Windows machine successfully, and may be just going with the flow using pre-installed crapware. Admittedly the full version of Windows comes with challenges that offset its greater power and flexibility, and it's not worth it for a lot of people who don't need any more than the very basics of computing. Although this is offset substantially by Windows 8, which provides a great deal of out-of-the-box protection for these kinds of users.

90%+ of consumers are "doing it wrong."

My netbook is used by several people, including kids. I have a desktop as my main PC. That netbook is practically useless for me personally.

Maybe a netbook running RT would be fine. But with Windows 7 the user experience sucks. And as much as you may try to lecture on how someone else is supposed to use a computer, that doesnt change the fact that the experience still sucks for the vast majority of people.

 

[Coan]

Anti-virus and anti-malware software is no substitute for safe computing practices, and if your machine is consumed by these types of programs you are doing it wrong. Sorry.

As for maintenance, Windows 7 comes with all of the maintenance tools you need built in. If you opt to install third party maintenance tools, that is at your discretion, but I would hardly call it mandatory.

Regarding performance, netbooks like the one I linked are not fast compared to more expensive laptops and desktops, but they still have FAR more CPU and GPU power than any ARM chip like the one in the Surface. If used correctly (say on a clean install of Windows 8), I doubt anyone would characterize it as slow or "horrid".

Your argument does make some sense if you're talking about inexperienced computer users who are incapable or unwilling to learn how to run a clean Windows machine successfully, and may be just going with the flow using pre-installed crapware. Admittedly the full version of Windows comes with challenges that offset its greater power and flexibility, and it's not worth it for a lot of people who don't need any more than the very basics of computing. Although this is offset substantially by Windows 8, which provides a great deal of out-of-the-box protection for these kinds of users.

Depends on the anti-virus/anti-malware package...netbooks aren't exactly given the best hardware, so depending on what you run, I can see resources being an issue.

Also, safe computing practices alone won't save you from the fact that if a normally mundane website you goto often gets hijacked, it can spread malware/viruses.

So, trying to stay safe is no substitute for having a proper package for AV.

The answer isn't one or the other, it's both. Protect yourself with the software and try to avoid putting yourself in the situation to need it in the first place.

which circles back to the issue where a netbook will lose a chunk of its resources to protecting itself, especially if you're using anything as bloated as most of the major packages (like norton.